How were we created? I'd like Creationist views. (Shed light on this Conpiracy)., page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 09:39 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by organism315
Get off the free will vs. determinism argument, please. Free will always seems to win, in the end, even though I'm a hard-determinist.

I fail to see how free will could possibly exist in our Universe.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:09 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

For an example of free will: Captain J. Edward Smith of the Titanic had years of experience doing Trans-Atlantic voyages years throughout of his career. Yet while holding the iceburg warning *common during that part of the year* he did something both his years of experience and his instincts as a experienced ship's captain says most definantly should not be done, he ordered more speed which proved to be the ship's and his downfall.
Cpt Edward Smith @wikipedia.org

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:10 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

Hate to say this as it sounds like an attack but please take it as I mean it. Just because you cannot understand something doesn't make it not true.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:29 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
For an example of free will: Captain J. Edward Smith of the Titanic had years of experience doing Trans-Atlantic voyages years throughout of his career. Yet while holding the iceburg warning *common during that part of the year* he did something both his years of experience and his instincts as a experienced ship's captain says most definantly should not be done, he ordered more speed which proved to be the ship's and his downfall.
Cpt Edward Smith @wikipedia.org

That doesn't prove free will.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:34 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by iWork4NWO

Hate to say this as it sounds like an attack but please take it as I mean it. Just because you cannot understand something doesn't make it not true.

Captain Obvious to the rescue!

Maybe you can shed some light on the problem. At the moment of Big Bang the trajectories of all particles were set. What has followed since is nothing but cause and effect over and over again. How can free will possibly exist in such a Universe?

[edit on 8-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:44 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

Considering consciousness is being proven to be a somewhat different animal altogether your question is moot.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:45 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

Sure does, he went against training, years of experience and instinct. If free will did not exist he would not have gone against those things.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 10:59 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by iWork4NWO

Considering consciousness is being proven to be a somewhat different animal altogether your question is moot.

So you're telling me that consciousness has some kind of super natural ability that enables it to counter the cause and effect stuff I was talking about?

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:02 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by iWork4NWO

Sure does, he went against training, years of experience and instinct. If free will did not exist he would not have gone against those things.

If anything this example speaks for no free will stance. If there was free will, then as a rational agent this guy would not have done the things he did if it was such an obvious mistake.

Free will, like the physical form of things is just an illusion.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:07 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

If that is what you want to believe that is perfectly fine. But your argument has holes, as I have pointed out. Without free will a person would acts as they are programed by experience to act *you have said this exact same thing*. Yet he did not, no amount of mental gymnastics would change that.
Eh well, something to be said about the comfortability of zealotry. You never have to re-evaluate.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:12 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Without free will a person would acts as they are programed by experience to act *you have said this exact same thing*.

With out free will we act exactly as stated by those trajectories that I was telling you about. "Experience" has no meaning, it's just previous states of particles. Nothing else.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:21 AM by iWork4NWO

The Christian faith is absurd. On the other hand you have this God character that is omniscient and thus knows everything, even things that still have not happened. Oh and somehow this God character has given us humans free will. If we had free will, then how could God know everything that is going to happen? On top of this we're apparently judged by our actions. Absurd to the potent of eleventy.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:28 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

Ah, but his "trajectory" was that he would not have sped up in so ambigious a situation. Can we stop the mental gymnastics now and agree to disagree and forthwith drop it?

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:29 AM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

To bad I am not speaking from a Christian standpoint and even if I did I doubt your comment would offend me much. The fact that your making the assumption that I am speaking of free will because of Christianity is showing.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 11:39 AM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by iWork4NWO

Ah, but his "trajectory" was that he would not have sped up in so ambigious a situation.

Why? I think you really haven't gotten my point. You don't speak Finnish by any chance? Perhaps I can't explain myself clearly enough in English..

[edit on 8-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 12:02 PM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by iWork4NWO

Unfortunately no, only speak English and Bad English.

But my argument stands that was it not for free will he would not have gone against consistant past experience and consistant past behavior.
1+1=2 after all, not 1+1=fish.
Especially considering the gamble he uncharacteristicaly took and lost.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 12:10 PM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by iWork4NWO

Unfortunately no, only speak English and Bad English. But my argument stands that was it not for free will he would not have gone against consistant past experience and consistant past behavior.
1+1=2 after all, not 1+1=fish.
Especially considering the gamble he uncharacteristicaly took and lost.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Your argument is that without free will his past experience alone would have determined his actions. My argument is that we don't have any control over our actions. That trajectory stuff I've been speaking of determines everything. It's all just one big illusion of sort. There's no matter, there is no will. We're just spectators of a great #ing show.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 12:18 PM by melatonin

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by iWork4NWO

Unfortunately no, only speak English and Bad English. But my argument stands that was it not for free will he would not have gone against consistant past experience and consistant past behavior.
1+1=2 after all, not 1+1=fish.
Especially considering the gamble he uncharacteristicaly took and lost.

But it doesn't really show that the decision was not 'caused'. I actually think Smith did as he was expected, wasn't there an assessment of his actions which said he did as was the norm?

Anyway, I go for compatibilism. Free will and determinism can co-exist. I make my decisions, all are caused in some way by something internal or external. I am the sum of my biology and experiences. I am the captain of my ship.

"Due to Circumstances
Beyond my Control,
I am the
Master of my Fate
and the Captain
of my Soul."

Not the free will some want, I guess.

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 12:24 PM by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by melatonin

Anyway, I go for compatibilism. Free will and determinism can co-exist. I make my decisions, all are caused in some way by something internal or external. I am the sum of my biology and experiences. I am the captain of my ship.

This stuff is built upon Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion:

Wave seems to move horizontally across the open sea, but the molecules of water move actually vertically. How about us? Are we more like waves than things we see as permanent like rocks or cars?

Think of an experience from your childhood. Something you remember clearly, something you can see, feel, maybe even smell, as if you were really there. After all, you really were there at the time, weren't you? How else would you remember it? The thing is. You weren't there! Not a single atom that is in your body today was there when that event took place. Matter flows from place to place and momentarily comes together to be you. Whatever you are, therefore, you're not the stuff of which you're made.

Technically speaking some molecules of your bones might have been there, but anyways..

[edit on 8-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]

reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 12:28 PM by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

reply to post by melatonin

We are in agreement, well, somewhat. I think how we define the terms are off. We are compelled to do certain things *biology, experience, preference and so forth* but when where we exercise free will is when we act against those compellments. *is that even a word?*

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^